Can you pass the 'Citizen's Guide to Firearms ID' test?

I shoulda saved it but I didn't when I was clicking around the other day and saw this photo of a cop holding up an AR-15/M4 variant, which some clueless journalist had labeled in the caption as an "AK-47 assault rifle" used in a crime somewhere.

I worked as a journalist for more than 30 years and stupidity about firearms is just one of the many failings of the vast majority of the leftwingnuts that populate the media these days. And they can't spell either.

Anyway, I stole the image at right from Fark.com where it was used to poke a bit of fun at the clueless about guns.

So let's use it for a Gun IQ test. I'll go first. Starting at top left, we have a genuine AK-47 7.62x39mm then an AR-15 .223/5.56mm. Either could be semi-auto or full auto.

Second row is FN PS-90 5.7x28mm semi-auto bullpup carbine (or perhaps the full-auto version) and then the Israeli Uzi 9mm submachine gun, could be full-auto or semi-auto.

Third row, Barret .50 cal. semi-auto sniper rifle (or perhaps Armalite, certainly I got the type and caliber right) and then a Walther PPK or PPK/S .380 ACP semi-auto pistol. It's hard to tell the two apart without a ruler.

Third row is a CZ-75 9mm semi-auto (or one of the many clones of that great pistol) and a Russian RPG launcher with the rocket-propelled grenade it launches (or maybe a Chinese copy).

Fourth row is some kinda pepper spray device, don''t know for sure. And last could be a Plymouth Valiant, but that's just a guess. It is a genuine klunker and I seem to associate that awful shade of puke green/blue with the Plymouth Valiant. Now you give it a try.

Obama pushes treaty to ban reloading and BB guns

If President Obama could slap us gun-owners with restrictions that could ban reloading and perhaps even BB guns without having to seek Congressional approval, would he do it? According to the Gun Owners of America, he's doing just that with an international treaty he's supporting.

President Obama is determined to eradicate the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding American citizens.

In recent meetings with Mexican President Felipe Calderón, the American President promised to urge the U.S. Senate to pass an international arms control treaty.

The treaty, cumbersomely titled the “Inter-American Convention Against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, and Other Related Materials” (known by the acronym CIFTA), was signed by President Bill Clinton, but never ratified by the Senate.

President Obama is hoping to capitalize on an increased Democrat majority and push its quick ratification. The U.S. is one of four nations that have not ratified the treaty.

If ratified and the U.S. is found not to be in compliance with any provisions of the treaty -- such as a provision that would outlaw reloading ammunition without a government license -- President Obama would be empowered to implement regulations without Congressional approval.

This CIFTA treaty would ban "illicit manufacturing of firearms" but what does that mean?

“Illicit manufacturing” of firearms is defined as “assembly of firearms [or] ammunition... without a license...”

Hence, reloading ammunition -- or putting together a lawful firearm from a kit -- is clearly “illicit manufacturing.” Modifying a firearm in any way would surely be “illicit manufacturing.” And, while it would be a stretch, assembling a firearm after cleaning it could, in any plain reading of the words, come within the screwy definition of “illicit manufacturing.”

“Firearm” has a similarly questionable definition. Borrowing from the open-ended definitions in federal law which have continue to vex us (and people like Olofson in Wisconsin), any barreled weapon “which... may be readily converted to expel a bullet” would be a firearm. Even worse, “any other weapon” (a term which is not defined) is a “firearm.” This surely includes BB guns -- and who knows what else.

“Cartridge cases” and “projectiles” are defined as “ammunition.”

How Clintonesque. If Obama can get the Senate to sign the CIFTA treaty, then he gets to define what "illicit manufacturing of firearms" means. Or as Bill Clinton so famously said, it all depends on what the meaning of "is" is. Are you surprised? I'm not.

If you'd like to write your Senator to oppose CIFTA, go here at Gun Owners of America.

National Parks To Allow Right-To-Carry

Just received this notice from NRA-ILA:

The U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), through the National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, has announced the final amended version of its changes to rules on carrying of firearms in national parks and wildlife refuges. DOI's move will restore the rights of law-abiding gun owners who wish to transport and carry firearms for lawful purposes on most DOI lands, and will make federal law consistent with the state law in which these public lands are located. NRA led the effort to amend the existing policy regarding the carrying and transportation of firearms on these federal lands.

About time, but how long will it take the incoming Obama administration and whoever he picks for Interior Secretary to overturn this rules change? Not long, I'm betting. Enjoy your freedom while you can, gun owners and concealed-carry-permit holders. You are now free to move about armed in parks.